ACIT,Circle-2(1), Mysore V. M/s Toyota Techno Park India(P)Ltd, Bangalore

ITA 17/BANG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 1721114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ETWA MUNDA
• Assessee Lawyers: P DINESH
• Section: 143(3); 260A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE SHRI N BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE RESIDENT AND SMT. P MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.17/BA NG/2011 (ASST. YEAR - 2007-08) THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), NO.55/1, OPP. STERLING THEATRE, VISHWESHWARNAGAR, MYSORE. . APPELLANT VS. M/S TOYOTA TECHNO PARK IND. (P) LTD., PLOT NO.20, BIDADI INDUSTRIAL AREA, RAMANAGARAM DIST. . RESPONDENT PAN NO.AAACT7456 J. APPELLANT BY : SHRI ETWA MUNDA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P DINESH DATE OF HEARING : 28-12-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-12-2011 O R D E R PER P MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AT ITA NO.17/B/11 2 MYSORE DATED 28.10.2010. THE APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : I) THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT RENTAL INCOME RECEIVED FORM THE OCCUPANTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL PARK IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS OR PROFESSIONAL INCOME FOLLOWING ITATS ORDER FOR THE EARLIER AYS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE ORDER OF THE AO ON THE FACTS DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. II) THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACTS THAT THE ORDER OF ITAT HAS NOT ATTAINED FINALITY, AS THE ISSUE HAS BEEN AGITATED IN APPEAL U/S 260A BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. III) THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF AO APPLYING THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE CASE OF : A) EAST INDIA HA HARRY AND LAND DEVELOPMENT VS. CIT (42 ITR 49) ITA NO.17/B/11 3 B) SHAMBU INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., VS. CIT (263 ITR 143) 3. AS SEEN FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE VERY SAME ISSUE HAD ARISEN IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR TH E EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS AND THE TRIBUNAL HAD DECIDED THE I SSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE HOLDING THE RENTAL INCOME RECEIVED FRO M THE OCCUPANTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL PARK TO BE ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS OR PROFESSIONAL INCOME AND NOT INCOME FROM HOUSE PRO PERTY. 4. THE CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THE ITAT A ND THE REVENUE HAS COME IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ONLY TO KEEP THE ISSUE ALIVE, AS THEY HAVE ALREADY FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ITAT. 5. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON T O INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, WE DISMISS THE AP PEAL OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.17/B/11 4 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28TH DEC, 2011. SD/- SD/- (N BARATHVAJA SANKAR) (P MADHAVI DEVI) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER VMS. BANGALORE DATED : 28/12/2011 COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, I TAT, BANGALORE.